Quiero saber acerca de...

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 37 / Friday, February 26, 2021 / Rules and Regulations funding at the time an application window is opened.
Adopt provisions to ensure a more technology-neutral scoring process, including eliminating any bonus points for networks that offer symmetrical speeds or providers in states who have authorized electric cooperatives to offer broadband service.
Agency response: The agency will consider eliminating preferential scoring for high-speed symmetrical systems in the next funding window.
Allow automated certification for businesses served.
Agency response: The agency continues to explore options for publicly available data that could be used to count businesses. However, note that RUS may or may not use businesses as a scoring criteria in future rounds of funding.
Do not deny entire applications when one area proposed to be served is ineligible, instead modifying the application to exclude the ineligible area.
Agency response: Under this regulation, the Agency has the ability to revise applications by excluding ineligible areas. Notwithstanding that ability, for grant applications subject to scoring and competition, the Agency can only do this when eliminating the ineligible area would not modify the application or require that the applicant revise the application.
Require that awardees comply with the FCCs pole attachment rules and fee restrictions.
Agency response: Awardees that are subject to the FCC are already required to follow these requirements. For other entities not subject to the FCC, the Agency cannot impose these requirements without authority.
The following comments apply to the challenge process:
Increase transparency in the challenge process by making maps available of eligible areas and keeping them updated.
Agency response: The Agency continually updates its mapping with any new information it receives.
However, it is impossible to update mapping with information that the Agency is not aware of. That is why the Agency can only make a final determination by sending staff to the area to complete a field analysis.
Publicly post written decisions on challenges explaining RUSs reasons for granting or denying the challenge prior to an award being issued for the challenged area.
Agency response: For Round 2, public notice response respondents are already being notified if their challenge was
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:49 Feb 25, 2021

Jkt 253001

successful or not. Unfortunately, RUS
cannot make public its responses to challenges because the information submitted by respondents is protected from release by law.
Allow for appeals of decisions on challenges prior to announcing an awardUpdate the map of eligible areas following the final resolution of each challenge and award and before applications are submitted for the next round of funding.
Agency response: The Agency will take this recommendation under consideration for future rounds. With respect to the latter request, that is already being done.
Respondent Three RUS should consider allowing subsidiaries to use facilities and assets of affiliates to satisfy application and program requirements.
Agency response: There are procedures currently in place that allow for this scenario. In the future, the Agency will continue to consider the possibility of allowing co-applicants.
The following comments apply to the application process:
Refine option for a company to apply for Rural eConnectivity Program funds using a dedicated subsidiary:
Agency response: If the subsidiary can meet the requirements of the program, they are eligible to apply. Additionally, in order that the security arrangements are maintained, the agency has been amendable to entering into co-awardee agreements where assets must be held by a subsidiary.
Consider reforms that would make it easier for companies to apply directly at the parent or operating company level.
Agency response: The proposed regulation has made allowances for publicly traded companies that provide them with more options on applying.
Simplify the means by which an applicants technical capabilities and financial viability can be confirmed such as using public information filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissions for financial viability or narrative or aggregated information about existing experience in the marketplace for technical viability.
Agency response: The proposed regulation now contains options for publicly traded companies not to have to submit forward looking financial projections.
Consider eliminating or substantially reducing application requirements relating to NFSAs. Submission of detailed information regarding NFSAs is more administratively burdensome for larger applicants.

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

11605

Agency response: The proposed regulation permits publicly traded companies not to submit NFSAs if they meet certain requirements.
Submitting detailed information and projections regarding services, investments and customers within NFSAs raises significant competitive concerns that outweigh any limited benefit.
Agency response: With respect to the submission of information that may be competitive, the Agency protects the release of business proprietary information to the full extent under the law. In order to understand the entire financial picture of an applicant, the Agency must review the operations of NFSAs. However, the proposed regulation now reduces that burden for publicly traded companies, by permitting them not to submit NFSAs if they meet certain requirements.
Requiring applicants to submit forward-looking projections for NFSAs creates risks for publicly traded companies. Limit projections just to PFSAsSimplify submissions for NFSAs.
Agency response: Per the proposed regulation, publicly traded companies do not have to submit NFSAs if they meet certain requirements.
Instead of submission of geospatial data through the mapping tool, should consider allowing applicants to submit a more general description of their existing footprints.
Agency response: In order to stop overlapping funding, a copy of the PFSA is necessary. This shapefile will also be required to be submitted as part of the statutory reporting requirements and will have to be updated annually.
Consider de-coupling the requirement to submit mapping information for an applicants NFSAs from the submission of other information such as customer count, service offerings and further business projections.
Agency response: The agency is committed to assisting the federal government in mapping out broadband availability in rural areas as much as it can. The agency understands that this may be an onerous undertaking for publicly traded companies, and so the agency has created a carve-out for these entities if they meet certain requirements.
Rather than require applicants to identify competitive offerings from other providers within each NFSA, consider allowing applicants to provide narrative information describing the competition they face from other providers.
Agency response: Competitive information is extremely important to
E:FRFM26FER1.SGM

26FER1